1. Title, director and release year?
The Forest for the Trees, Bernadine Mellis, 2006
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This movie calls into question who is going to police the police.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Deforestation of redwood forests through unsustainable logging.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The simple facts that the FBI did not look at the death threats to Judi and that the nails in the trunk of the car were clearly not the same ones used in the bomb made it very clear to me that the FBI had knowingly falsely arrested Judi. When Judi was shown discussing issues with the loggers and deciding to stop spiking trees showed me that she really was fighting the logging company’s methods rather than the loggers themselves.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I was not compelled by the argument that the logging companies’ tactics were causing jobs to be lost. It was not made clear why that happened and it was not connected to the other arguments against the logging companies.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I want to look closer at other trials where the FBI was accused of or found to be corrupt. I would also like to see which issues were involved in those trials.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
This film will surprise many people who think that the government is right in everything they do. People need to realize that they cannot rely on the government to change the way we are using resources and finding ways to shed our oil dependence and other sustainability issues.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This movie suggests that people shown take more actions on their own and not rely on the government to tell them how to solve problems.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
There could have been more information on where negotiations currently were between Judi and logging companies at the time of her bombing. I would have also liked to hear more about the other person in the car with Judi when it was bombed.
1. Title, director and release year?
The Forest for the Trees, Bernadine Mellis, 2006
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This movie calls into question who is going to police the police.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Deforestation of redwood forests through unsustainable logging.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The simple facts that the FBI did not look at the death threats to Judi and that the nails in the trunk of the car were clearly not the same ones used in the bomb made it very clear to me that the FBI had knowingly falsely arrested Judi. When Judi was shown discussing issues with the loggers and deciding to stop spiking trees showed me that she really was fighting the logging company’s methods rather than the loggers themselves.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I was not compelled by the argument that the logging companies’ tactics were causing jobs to be lost. It was not made clear why that happened and it was not connected to the other arguments against the logging companies.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I want to look closer at other trials where the FBI was accused of or found to be corrupt. I would also like to see which issues were involved in those trials.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
This film will surprise many people who think that the government is right in everything they do. People need to realize that they cannot rely on the government to change the way we are using resources and finding ways to shed our oil dependence and other sustainability issues.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This movie suggests that people shown take more actions on their own and not rely on the government to tell them how to solve problems.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
There could have been more information on where negotiations currently were between Judi and logging companies at the time of her bombing. I would have also liked to hear more about the other person in the car with Judi when it was bombed.